You are on page 1of 3

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-6030

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
TWANNETTE HOLLAND,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District
Judge. (CR-03-72; CA-04-434-2)
Submitted:

May 27, 2005

Decided:

June 21, 2005

Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Twannette Holland, Appellant Pro Se. Alan Mark Salsbury, Assistant
United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:
Twannette Holland, a federal prisoner, seeks to appeal the
district courts order denying relief on her 28 U.S.C. 2255
(2000) motion.

This order is not appealable unless a circuit

justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability.

28 U.S.C.

2253(c)(1); see Reid v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363, 368-69, 374 n.7
(4th Cir. 2004).

A certificate of appealability will not issue

absent a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional


right.

28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2000).

A prisoner satisfies this

standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that


the district courts assessment of his constitutional claims is
debatable and that any dispositive procedural findings by the
district court are also debatable or wrong.

See Miller-El v.

Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S.
473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001).
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Holland
has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we deny a

certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.


We also deny Hollands motions for appointment of counsel and
for leave to proceed in forma pauperis.

We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately


presented in the materials before the court and argument would not
aid the decisional process.

- 2 -

DISMISSED

- 3 -

You might also like